- From: Romain Menke via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 20:07:35 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> This is the cost of transpiling ahead of shipping implementations, yes. The same is true for sass. Any argument goes both ways here :) If we are arguing that the spec should be changed because sass tanspiles in a specific way we can also argue that it shouldn't be changed because PostCSS transpiles in a specific way. In principle I do agree that any polyfill that is shipped before implementations is likely to see breaking changes. But this specific change is being made to accommodate sass, not to help authors or implementations. > What do you mean by this? This returns us to the prior rules for compound selectors, where a type selector, if present, must occur first. Maybe it is not yet too late to take this back and it won't be seen as an exception. I am not the right person to judge this given how used I am to all the iterations this specification has seen :) To me it now seems like a weird exception, but it might not be. -- GitHub Notification of comment by romainmenke Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/8662#issuecomment-1490882053 using your GitHub account -- Sent via github-notify-ml as configured in https://github.com/w3c/github-notify-ml-config
Received on Thursday, 30 March 2023 20:07:37 UTC